In 1995 the corrupt “Broken Trust” trustees of Kamehameha Schools commissioned ex-Governor John Waihee to investigate relocating KSBE’s legal domicile outside Hawaii. His recommendation: Relocate to the Cheyenne River Sioux Indian Reservation. The advantage? Cheyenne River is the most “sovereign” of all the Indian reservations. It has its own tribal police force, judiciary, legislature and presidency. It has “government to government” relations with the US and is not subject to any state and many federal laws. Attorney General Margery Bronster explained: "They were into empire building instead of working for the education of Hawaiian children."

The first version of the Akaka Bill was introduced to Congress six months after the Bishop Estate Trustees were forced to resign. Why move to a mainland Indian Reservation when OHA can build a “Hawaiian” Indian Reservation?

Fast-forward to 2018.

It has been years since anyone in Congress has introduced any version of the Akaka Bill. But the Broken Trust effort to turn native Hawaiians into a fake Indian tribe in order to create a legal jurisdiction behind which the legions of criminals in Hawaii's political class could then conduct their illegal activities without fear of prosecution is suddenly and momentarily front-and-center as Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono and California Senator Kamala Harris flail away at President Donald J Trump’s latest Supreme Court nominee.

PJ Media: …the senator then proceeded to discuss an 18-year-old Supreme Court case in which Kavanaugh wrote an amicus brief (and a Wall Street Journal op-ed), Rice v. Cayetano (2000). After three minutes of parsing each of Kavanaugh's arguments and attacking them as deeply offensive, Hirono asked him an oddly specific question about an email in 2002.

During Hirono's diatribe, Kavanaugh attempted to get a word in edgewise. As the senator declared, "Let me tell you why each of these assertions are wrong," he responded, "The Supreme Court agreed, 7 to 2." Hirono continued, and at one point she paused.

Finally, after her pontificating speech about how Kavanaugh is such an offensive and disgusting person, Hirono asked about a specific email.

The judge responded, "So Senator, first of all, I appreciate your perspective. The amicus brief I wrote, the Supreme Court agreed with it, by a 7-2 decision written by Justice Kennedy."

"In the case, just so I'm clear, it was a state office that denied African Americans the ability to vote in that state office. Latinos and other people were denied the ability to vote for a state office, and the question was whether that was permissible under the Constitution, and the Supreme Court by a 7 to 2 majority..." Kavanaugh began.

Hirono then cut him off once again. "I attended that Supreme Court hearing, and I believe that one of the reasons they kept asking, trying to figure out whether native Hawaiians constitute tribes is probably because of the amicus that you put in there," she said. Indeed, Kavanaugh argued that native Hawaiians did not constitute Native American tribes under federal law. But this argument came up 18 years ago, and the Supreme Court agreed with him.

At last, Kavanaugh was able to address the email, which was technically Hirono's "question." "That's an email 16 years ago. I don't recall what I was thinking about," he said.

Finally, Hirono got to the crux of the issue. She asked Kavanaugh if he thought Rice v. Cayetano "raises constitutional questions when Congress passes laws to benefit native Hawaiians." Only this issue would have any bearing on the nominee's Supreme Court jurisprudence.

Kavanaugh gave a clear and succinct answer. "I think Congress's power when it come to an issue like that is substantial," he said. "Congress has substantial power with respect to programs like this. The specific case was about election to a state office."

Even so, Hirono pressured him further on the question. She commented, "One would hope that the advocates would actually proffer facts to the court, and that is not what you did when you filed your amicus to the court." Then she proceeded to comment that the nominee's "argument raises a significant question about how you would rule on the constitutionality of programs benefitting Alaska Natives."….

(Translation: This is a long-winded attempt to flip the two Alaska Senators’ votes against Kavanaugh by conflating the federal recognition of tribal native Alaskan communities with non-tribal native Hawaiians.)

PJ:Media …turned to her other white supremacist witch hunt topic. "Have you ever heard the term 'racial spoils system'?" she asked.

After the nominee admitted that he had, Harris pointed to his Wall Street Journalop-ed explaining his amicus brief in the Supreme Court case Rice v. Cayetano (2000). In that op-ed, Kavanaugh used the term "racial spoils system" twice. Harris asked what the term "racial spoils system" means to the nominee.

"I'm not sure what I was referring to then. But what I do know is that the Supreme Court, on a 7-2 margin..." agreed with his position.

Harris again cut him off. "Are you aware that the term is commonly used by white supremacists?" she asked.

"Senator, when I wrote that, that was 20 years ago, in the context of a voting restriction that denied African-Americans and Latinos the ability to vote in Hawaii, I was representing a client when I articulated that," Kavanaugh responded.

Harris went on to call "racial spoils system" a "loaded term," essentially a dog whistle for white supremacy….